Korg Forums Forum Index Korg Forums
A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world.
Moderated Independently.
Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

John Hendry Proves CERN Neutrino Data Correct
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korg Forums Forum Index -> Off Topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 6:55 am    Post subject: Last post on this level Reply with quote

Just for the record….a good attorney defending the guilty takes the truth and uses symmetry to reverse it. Sanderxpander is trying to do this and xmlguy is acting in desperation to do so. At no time did I insult him (or xmlguy) and despite his "provoking" me I was very respectful to him as my posts show. His last reply is the ultimate copout. As is xmlguy’s “For the record, I haven't referred to the CERN information at all.”

Why would I be banned for following Korg Forum Guidelines? He is trying to use psychology to lower my group status and that often works….. on unintelligent people. The lesser diesis is straight out of Music Theory which is the proven mathematics of harmonics and its physics is obviously related to Music even if he or the other 3 cannot understand it…or care not to try. Its introduction into a top level Music Forum is well placed especially since it’s a follow up to something that held attention long before 3 of these guys breaking Korg Forum rules were even members of this forum.

This is a site for Professional Musicians as well as people who want to be of that caliber to establish their growth. The Professionals here should not be penalized by individuals that “want” to be professionals but cannot understand 9th grade mathematics and instead chose to insult and attack a person’s character in an animal based group manner. The mathematics used by the Professional Musicians and technicians on this forum far exceeds what I posted to show something very simple yet amazing for the forum membership to see. There is and always has been attached to Music a greater depth of understanding than held by the average non-musician that is held by many members of this Forum and certainly the Great Musicians of our Time such as the Beatles. Professional Musicians do not attack people supporting such awareness to be blunt; an awareness xmlguy will never possess IMO as he wanders lost in his own reactionary self-generated fog.

CERN and SLAC’s E158 data represent billions and billions of research dollars spent and years of research time put in by countless scientists and was used to show a circle completed that started on Korg Forum and goes back to my first “off topic” post that remained in the News section for almost a year linked to off topic: The Weak Force is an Oscillator. Those that participated in the deep symmetry of the UFT thread understand what that means at least to some degree as well the price of aspirin. Dealing with true symmetry in relationship to the Observer in relativity is difficult but some here did it. If you don’t “get it” then get out some old Beatles records and listen to the words because physics just “got it”. The scientists have no choice but to accept what their own data tells them. Einstein was right…..no more dice. Real inertial frame based time is back! Newton would have never let it go.

Aciphecs said: “For me it was when he posted his Fabio-look-alike and Chief-rants-alot pictures in this thread.” Aciphecs you seem to forget that “this thread” was pepperpotty’s own “get to know you” thread. But your reaction and statement in violation of this Forum’s rules attacking a member’s appearance certainly shows your need for “other” people’s attention and support to follow. And when was the last time you turned down a modeling contract BTW? That “Fabio” picture was taken by Stuart Price but I find the whole “social status” thing based on looks and appearance a bit disgusting and find what is in a person’s heart is far more important as in the end it controls the outcome of the outer filter that forms our bodies anyway. If that is what brother’s you….you have a real problem with your own self-image I’d say. I have always been a mirror to others and laugh when some describe me especially the defendants in my lawsuit harming so many people for their own greed. For how could I be so many different people? Good people see me as good, bad as bad (for stopping them), and idiots as idiots (for informing them).

xmlguy said: “Feel free to post links to any credible scientists who directly agree with you and specifically refer to your posts as news.”
I just posted the figures available on Korg Forum since it was open 6 hours ago on Nature magazine’s site that as a whole represents “credible” and it’s now too busy to get through but here is where the “real scientists” stopped posting rebuttals, about as close to agreeing as it will get till zillions of calculations are done and the politics even out. Nature states posts are vetted (removed), but I’ve never seen a change to larger font size before. I wonder who edits the forum. http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110922/full/news.2011.554.html

Post 27341 was a “credit decoy” as I recalculated immediately but it got SLAC E158 search hit rate going up and 27540 was my first accurate with lesser diesis posted. But best evidence is the increase in Google search page numbers on SLAC E158 since Oct 3, 2011 as money is a strong incentive to take what you can and call it your own as Rosalind Franklin learned, the scientist who captured the DNA’s X-Ray.

“Your claim seems to be news only in your own little world, not the real world.”

That is also exactly what you said about my legal situation which you know is a lie but were willing to discredit me by saying it. I always thought you had a real issue with seeing reality as it is. I now know that for a fact.

“since nobody else in their right mind and with any credibility has seen fit to agree with you and announce it for themselves as news.”

LOL…the mathematics did that for me and certainly there is a reason the high caliber rebuttals just suddenly stopped….right after my posts except this one right below my first post.

“Dear Antonio Ereditato,
I am taking you up on your appeal for scrutiny of the results from the OPERA experiment that you made public at a BBC News interview on September 22nd, 2011 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484) : we want just to be helped by the community in understanding our crazy result because it is crazy. When I heard your name on TV, in newspapers, etc. I was reminded of, and hopefully you will recall, the several dinners and gatherings over several years we shared at CERN 30 years ago with Luciano Ramello, Tiziano Camporesi, Mario Caria, Vittorio Remondino, etc. when I was working at CERN on the trigger of the Delphi experiment. Here is my scrutiny of the results of your experiment.” Cut, very long post.

“Believe me, it was not trivial for me to design DUT (Device Under Test) boards at the Superconducting Super Collider in 1992 for the HP8200 half-million dollar test station of integrated circuits with a time resolution accuracy of 50 picoseconds at all pins of the device under test. I was certain that my design and circuit implementation were correct only by comparing signals.” Cut

“In research it is important to discuss, identify, and implement scientific procedures that allow the laws of nature to be understood”

And that is exactly what I did. I used their procedure’s data to show the function of the neutrino in nature is to transfer photon energy from the weak force into the strong force just as was discussed on this forum years ago (without the neutrino named as the part used) and I used two separate groups of data considered unrelated to prove it, as well other observations past this forums scope of interest level that also support it.
There is a scale of probability used in experiments and when you do what I have done, take CERN’s 6-sigma data and SLAC’s 6.3 sigma data extended to a moment arm of 1000 years meaning it is even more accurate by its extended scale, and combine them to check each other based on a theory (UFT) proven correct if they do, and they not only do but fall within a level of accuracy that cannot exceed a 6-sigma+ based figure of error (size of comma produced) that is below 2.5 Nano seconds you have a result that far exceeds a 6-sigma rating and may even be within an area of immeasurable error by today’s standards….which won’t last long after the UFT invades physics to add real inertial frame based time back in the books on physics and make that measurement look sloppy.

“you claimed to have proven something”

Yes I have…and it is quite obvious, but I’m afraid its way over your head to understand since you refuse to look and would rather make up stories that harm people to support your view of reality required to support your view of politics and associated physics.

What you said about me…is really what you are saying about yourself in truth and that goes for Mr. Handsome who I wouldn’t trust to put in a light bulb and understand the reaction. “Of course his last post is another whiny rant towards xml.” (After I called him a clown….which I’m not really because clowns aren’t this creepy and you can tell I’m a professional by my hands on instrument approach….and check out the headphones.) “Bottom line is Korg forums ought to retain some sense of professionalism instead of being a public podium for psychobabble. We're sound designers, producers and keyboardists. Let John Hendry unload his baggage on some other schmuck's forum.”

Sharp’s not a schmuck…..and he said it was news because it’s obvious.

End of discussion on this level of this thread. If you cannot contribute, then don’t.

CERN’s v-c/c=2.48e-5 = SLAC 2.48e-5 +.20e-5 Einstein's Comma = Verification


John^^
_________________
Think Peace...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SanderXpander
Platinum Member


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860

PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You think you're defending yourself, but do you really not see how every single one of your posts undermines your "group status" far more than one of our replies ever could?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sharp
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Posts: 18197
Location: Ireland

PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
CERN’s v-c/c=2.48e-5 = SLAC 2.48e-5 +.20e-5 Einstein's Comma = Verification


Just spotted this...


An independent experiment confirms that subatomic particles have wrong energy spectrum for superluminal travel.
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111020/full/news.2011.605.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 1:13 am    Post subject: My Post's on Nature's Fourm Reply with quote

“Andrew Cohen and Sheldon Glashow's conclusion is theoretical and their own Very Special Relativity theory comes closer to being in direct contrast with their resent statement than being supported when you examine the published facts and look at the research findings of SLAC E158 on the Asymmetry of the Weak Force. This is something they obviously did not look for but hopefully my pointing out Einstein's Comma will bring it to light.”

What is amazing is they got what would happen to the neutrino if you ran time backwards correct showing me someone on their level would agree I was correct in it's creation.....having it go in the right direction of course with the arrow of time. No way in heck it can change into it's base particle pair but it shows they can't steal my theory after saying that;-) They have high stakes on it having it not be superluminal and need it to go SLOWER that light to protect their VSR theory. To explain the neutrino's single spin direction they think light can get ahead of it but because of the asymmetry of space you can't look back at it to see a reverse spin direction.

But Cohen and Glashow’s VSR sure did open up the door for the UFT and SLAC’s E158 data creating the proper size comma being accepted and space being asymmetrical protecting the causal set and measured (observed) Lorentz symmetry at this scale as the speed of Light is exceeded by the neutrino doing it's job. Attacking Lorentz symmetry is just one step below attacking Einstein's theory so having them open the door on this through their observations as well as giving space a "preferred direction”, an assumption that brings back real time when "preferred" is held in one direction, really opened the door for Real Relativity and the UFT that adds the Observer's weight into the make-up of the Universe.....one thing Einstein in his younger years would not consider as plausible it seems.

Did you notice after my posts went up the noted scientists all of a sudden stopped posting rebuttals? And Nature’s editors increased the size of the font on the last paragraph of all my last data posts showing them how to do the calculations? I can’t do that as no matter what font I use it defaults to Nature's forum font. I waited to post on the article below to see what would happen and see if people were posting and paying attention as the article you linked got only 12 posts (4 posts not vetted after my # 7 from 1st) went up with my second post on that article. But again I am bottom post with small supporting post below it. I think I got their attention……thanks to Stanford’s SLAC team.

University of Eugene’s radio station KWVA says they are interested in doing a thread on this. They announced the UFT in 08 but were telling listeners to go to Korg.com, not the forum so never got connected.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

Edit Sept 2, 2019 RE: nature.com link above.

This was just brought to my attention. The above "Faster-than-Light neutrino" Nature Forum article dealing with a difference in gravity affecting clock synchronization was posted on October 5, 2011 and a correction made on Oct 7, 2011. Like the other "Faster-than-Light neutrino" Nature Forum discussions at this time this one was flooded with professional posts debating the historic event. This type of event with such an immense worldwide forum response, like the article content created, are highly desirable and left up because they generate advertising revenue.

Important articles make Nature's weekly Journal money true or not using the top advertising banner area set aside just for that reason. Time tells all but money is a close second at exposing the truth. So Nature will generally close commenting to avoid monitoring and removing unwanted posts and leave the article and it's forum discussions intact, especially ones of value creating world wide attention above anything else! So what do we see going on here? The fact of the matter is these FTL neutrino posts were a goldmine yet they buried it. If you click on the link above now researching the historic event you see after the commenting was closed it was reopened on Oct. 1, 2013 and left open till Dec. 12, 2013 creating gibberish that looks like the articles original discussion forum posts. It hides the size of the event and this was obviously done for some reason. Follow the money and find the answer...

The first article post by James Hope says: "Great work. Thanks for sharing us very informative website .It is very useful for personal trainer.Luca I appreciate your intelligence and thought provoking knowledge.For getting different knowledge visit this website"... followed by a non-working ad link.

Every single post filling up the page replacing all the original pages of valuable money generating posts is gibberish advertising links with the last post on 2013-10-01 by suyash Sharma saying "Now many people know this topic. Very attractive. So I came to a published personal opinion, only a person point of view. Again, I recommend you use this station." followed by another ad link.

Someone said "What happens on the Internet stays on the Internet" and nothing could be less true as information can be changed and manipulated to practice the art of mind bending and deception. But logic connected to information can show why and the general term "follow the money" will usually point you in the right direction to apply at each crossroad for directions.

So why using $logic$ would Nature's managers and editors first remove money generating forum discussion threads that highlight the importance of the associated article left up, and then reopen the discussion forum over a year later for a short time to allow the articles discussion forum have all the original valuable real posts replaced with the same ad link posts they spend money monitoring to have removed? Why would they deliberately damage an articles money generating forum in such a way?

Follow the money but try not not to trip over the politics...


This is the first thing said in Natures comment section: "If you find something abusive or inappropriate or which does not otherwise comply with our Terms or Community Guidelines, please select the relevant 'Report this comment' link."

Some of Nature's Community Guidelines:
"#6.: Stay focused on science and research. This is a website about science for scientists and researchers.

#10: Report inappropriate comments. We strongly support the Nature.com community in maintaining high standards of participation. If you consider that a comment does not comply with these Guidelines or our Terms, please use the relevant Report Comment facility, located next to the comment in issue.

#12: Don't sell or promote stuff. If you have a product or service to sell or promote, you can buy advertising on this site. (see$)

#15. Don't post inappropriate links
You can only post links to another website if the content on that other site abides with these Guidelines and our Terms.

#17: Removing inappropriate content. Reader comments that violate the letter or spirit of these Guidelines or our Terms may be removed (or, if moderated in advance, may not be published in the first place). If we do remove something, we will generally remove whole posts, or where necessary, whole threads (not parts). This means that even if only one sentence is objectionable, the whole comment will usually be removed (or not published). Sometimes, a comment may be removed because it is connected to another comment which is being removed.

If your content has been removed, we may email you to let you know or to inform you if you have been suspended or banned from submitting further comments to the site.

If you are aware that content has been removed, you must not deliberately resubmit the same content."

Unless you post it on Korg Forum where real posts are protected and gibberish ad links are rejected. Right now Korg Fourm is ahead of Nature's Forum discussing adding gravity to the Standard Model due to Nature breaking it's own guidelines.

Follow the Money says the odds of taking the exact vast distance light travels in one hour and creating a specific ratio value by adding it to the unimaginably long distance light travels in one thousand years (SLAC E158 WF Asy ratio) to match a 453.6 mile measurement gaining 2.48e-5 sec by creating an asymmetry in time of 0.20e-5 sec. as predicted here years in advance cannot be a coincidence caused by a loose cable. Score one more point in favor of Korg Forum...


"Comments on this thread are vetted after posting."

"Commenting is now closed."

Mind bending at it's best.... most people don't even notice it.

John^^
_________________
Think Peace...


Last edited by John Hendry on Mon Sep 02, 2019 1:16 pm; edited 8 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iixorbiusii
Full Member


Joined: 30 Aug 2008
Posts: 198

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like they may have done it again...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236


Exclamation
_________________
CURRENT GEAR: A yellowing Casio PT-80, 4 leaking batteries and some broken headphones.
WISHLIST: A PSU and some different headphones.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:25 pm    Post subject: Another CERN conformation Reply with quote

Thanks’, I've been working on a paper and had not heard about this yet. CERN knew they were right when they announced it after spending so much time and money proving it, they just don’t know why, or at least didn't till I posted SLAC’s E158 data on Nature's site with the calculations needed to prove it was caused by the asymmetry of the weak force. When you take the distance light travels in 1000 years plus 1 hour gained and break that down into 453.6 miles and get an exact match that cannot be a coincidence and everyone in physics knows it but there is silence in the ranks as understanding it is another story especially with a degree in physics which required accepting symmetrical misunderstandings all the way through college This has led to not understanding aspects of physics such as why matter in the Universe is not 50% anti-matter, one of the greatest mysteries in physics that is explained by the UFT equation.

Mathematics allowed progress without understanding and physicists building the A-bomb were told to accept and calculate and it was not until the 60’s that physicists started to think and ask questions again.
CERN could not afford to make an error this massive and now they are just making people happy showing they did it right. We are on the verge of a major breakthrough and change in physics that is greater than any other change in past history due to the infrastructure in place that can verify data corrected. It’s a good thing as without a solution to our energy problem the outcome would be endless wars fighting over the last drop of oil till we destroy ourselves due to wasting Earth’s limited resources.

CERN’s v-c/c=2.48e-5 = SLAC 2.48e-5 +.20e-5 Einstein's Comma = Verification

John^^
_________________
Think Peace...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:30 am    Post subject: CERN v-c/c=2.48e-5 = SLAC E158 Update Reply with quote

Hay Guys you must have heard about the "lose cable". No one in physics believes it and I must deal with the politics...but look what I did. Remember the dice in quantum mechanics Einstein refused to accept and was ridiculed for not accepting? Here are three posts up showing he was correct. There has not been one expert argue against SLAC's E158 data matching CERN's but look at the deep silence it created.

"CERN’s neutrinos exceeding the speed of light @ v-c/c=2.48 sec in 453.6 miles is an exact match with Stanford’s SLAC E158 weak force asymmetry value showing the cause of 2.48e-5 is not the politics of a “loose fiber optic cable” checked countless times with the same “gain in space” shown by FERMI Lab’s neutrinos supporting an observation that goes back to 1947 and is summed up in 2007 by G. Nimtz and A. A. Stahlhofen who also thought it occurs outside the bounds of SR [arXiv:0708.0681v1] not aware of the simple explanation E158 data provides with direct proof provided by SLAC’s E158 data exposing a gain in 453.6 miles also @ 2.48e-5 with a .20 harmonic comma as I predicted for the needed asymmetry in the reverse arrow/phase of time the calculations reveal changing physics. SLAC’s data comes from the distance light travels in 1000 years at the speed of light in a ratio to a 1 hour SOL gain making this comparative measurement the most spectacular ever made in physics and does so in regard to the most important observation in the History of Man.

What this means is E=m+{a}c2 outside the weak force where E=mc2 inside it because the original equation does not include the photon’s force carrier space the neutrino provides to exit the weak force to the strong force. This changes physics far more that E=mc2 did due to the infrastructure in place to take advantage of the energy tap {a} provides. It brings back time in sync with Newton’s time but armed with E=mc2 corrected as well as Newton’s law by adding the second reverse phase in time held by “imaginary” numbers in physics that never adds up correct without {a} added to expose the second “real” phase in time. And one more thing, it shows we live in a world of only 3.6 seconds a year due to time dilation and that’s why atoms hang out so long but not their anti-matter reverse phases. When you look at the Sun you are observing the process of a speed of light clock where a thousand years in the inertial frame of the week force is an hour of a day relative to our body’s inertial frame of reference. Theata 13 shows there are 3 points of observation within the weak force as I showed Erin Edwards in demonstrating the chemical source timing relative to a true inertial frame of reference that Mass location in time provides to create it’s placement within the DNA’s Gene Ensemble Instance Location.

Evanescent modes in FTIR between double prisms show the neutrino space being added as a product of the creation of light as well as space. Consciousness has Mass: get over it and let’s move on and dump the politics. The cat’s Mass is out of the bag and it’s alive.

2nd:
I forgot to mention that the neutrino does not exceed the speed of light. The weak force forms its space at the speed of light in transferring the photon. We are looking at a speed of light clock running fast keeping antimatter and matter particle phases in opposite phase: when the anti-graviton (Mass) goes down the electron goes up, and when the graviton goes down the anti-electron (Mass) goes up. Mass is doing the Moon Dance.

You start out with a basic simple atom first as the smallest single “whole unit” measurement of forward time before moving ahead billions of years without a true inertial frame of reference and the “working” influence of time dilation and harmonic laws that dictate what atoms are missing neutrons in a stable state, and torn apart in violent states. Take the smallest subatomic particle and you can put it back in time/space where it formed and it will fit.

The Great Professor was right: there are no dice and {a} adds the cosmological constant needed to balance “H”. But remember we are dealing with concepts built out of time so you can’t have two sides of one concept at the same exact time. You can’t put up where down goes, or movement (velocity) with non-movement (position). But since you can’t have nothing (no Observer) without something (the Observer) to create the concept of nothing this logic creates an arrow to put a concept in an information frame whereas one side will tell you the other side. God plays cards to say “I Am” and slip us a new card in the middle of saying it.

This is the Planck-Einstein equation and I made it into two equations to deal with entropy which in physics has always been relative to the arrow of time, but I added the needed and obvious missing reverse Mass oscillation direction phase creating a second arrow of time so time can be whole and connected to itself for conservation. This is the Graviton phase opposite the Electron called the "Hole" and is/was dealt with in mathematics as "imaginary" so this changes mathematics as well as physics by adding a second reverse phase clock cycle to time. This is up, this is down, let’s go up and down. Now try to play the song without the second phase in rhythm: that was physics before neutrinos @ v-c/c=2.48e-5 came along and still is for the greater part of physics. The second arrow was also needed to add wf asy and the harmonic comma as well as create an "information frame" connected to an initial or true inertial frame of reference.

Low to high entropy, E=h+{a-lesser diesis}c/wavelength.
High to low entropy, E=h+{a}c/wavelength. The lesser diesis is named Einstein’s comma, but here its similar in concept to Maxwell’s Demon separating information frames.


Mass is only found in the inertial frame of reference of the weak force so E=mc2 is a concept itself. In the basic summery E=IR but also I=E/R, or wp=ST and S=wp/T where wp=weak pressure or quantum gravity that controls the direction of force time creates in space. It all depends on your chosen frame of reference: within the weak force or outside the weak force. Generally speaking “we” live outside the weak force and wp=S/T. But we certainly do have a connection to Mass and the ability to examine it.

Feynman introduced virtual particles in his diagrams as “non-observable” necessary intermediate states of an interaction process between observable “real” states. But as you can see neutrinos are quite observable as is their measurable effect using time that moves in two directions relative to the arrow of time within an atom.

3rd:
CERN’s neutrino data compared with SLAC’s E158 data dealing with an issue of space is making a tremendous impact on the study of time. Time requires a force that is provided by quantum gravity found in Mass within the weak force and was detected in the 80’s and called a “Zen event of one hand clapping” believed then to be a 5th force of Nature being detected by one of the most intelligent men in the World and an expert on the weak force, and this discovery was said to be making matters much more complicated because it was not understood. Had it been understood they had discovered the 2nd direction of Mass oscillation within the weak force they would have realized they had discovered the cause of mechanical non-subjective physical Mass based time to understand it, and the location of Mass and true anti-particle formation as well. (Manmade anti-matter is a reverse energy model, and with the only possible exception the neutrino [RE: Hyman theory of neutrino mass] Mass is not found outside the weak force Mass oscillation cycle.)

Quantum gravity is a unit measurement of E that starts the weak cycle as an anti-proton and it’s phase output is the anti-electron photon/neutrino pair becoming the anti-neutron and it’s phase input is the anti-graviton (what was detected) in the 4th phase of time in an atom’s anti-particle state which means Mass in the anti-graviton phase is oscillating back down and moving in a real non-imaginary reverse arrow of time exposing a reverse clock cycle where time runs backwards in the information frame between the anti-neutron and the next anti-proton showing time being conserved in the second arrow that points in the opposite direction of the initial arrow of time. I generally call it the second reverse arrow “of space” to separate the two arrows and because space is the force carrier of cosmological gravity. As Mass in the anti-graviton phase is gaining E back in the weak force moving in the second reverse arrow the mass potential energy of the electron outside the weak force is losing E and this is why we see electricity moving backwards to pressure in its analogy to the flow of water. Quantum gravity is pushing the electron up, but Mass in it’s anti-graviton phase is going backwards relative to the arrow of time when it does it so we have been observing this since Ohm whom I am sure must have racked his brain to understand why. Difference requires asymmetry and energy creates time so time like energy is being conserved between two clocks playing catch with Mass. Understanding gravity’s reverse phase/clock is the key to traveling beyond our solar system as well as designing the vehicle to get us there. The ITS helicopter control system concept is no longer reserved for rotors relying on air for inertial frame contact. Now we have time connected to space.

A change in physics doesn't get any bigger than this because it shows Albert Einstein was by far the greatest physicist that ever stepped foot on this planet to date far ahead of anyone holding a physics degree in basic insight and was right on what is or rather was regarded as his biggest weakness showing it to be the weakness of the minds using his equations, not his own as he violently refused to accept chance as a foundation stone of physics.

My addition here makes quantum mechanics the tool of accuracy it should be by adding the weight of the Observer as a constant to establish the fact that matter does not create Life, but rather Life creates matter and to those that claim parts of my work as their own insight you better not leave that part out. The Planck-Einstein equation sits right next to E=mc2 as one of the most important basic fundamental equations in physics and deals with the quantum unit of energy of the photon on the Planck scale which is the defining scale of quantum gravity where Mass, energy, temperature, length and time are all equivalent. Now QM can expose the cards replacing the dice by using time connected to an inertial frame of reference to do so. To explore this yourself see: http://www.calculator.org/property.aspx?name=Planck%20constant

I am still puzzled why physicists have such a hard time understanding time but Leonard Susskind sums up the direction Science is headed in this statement from the transcript of NOVA’s “THE FABRIC OF THE COSMOS: WHAT IS SPACE?” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/fabric-of-cosmos.html#fabric-space

LEONARD SUSSKIND:

"Is the three-dimensional world an illusion, in the same sense that a hologram is an illusion? Perhaps. I think I'm inclined to think yes, that the three-dimensional world is a kind of illusion and that the ultimate precise reality is the two-dimensional reality at the surface of the universe.
This idea is so new that physicists are still struggling to understand it. But if it's right, just as Newton and Einstein completely changed our picture of space, we may be on the verge of an even more dramatic revolution.”

But like all adventures this isn’t for followers and weak individuals.

"Relative to the Test Pilot all other Observers are behind it in time."

After you.....Wink


John^^
_________________
Think Peace...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 8:15 am    Post subject: The tital of this thead is wrong... Reply with quote

Hay guys, the other day after I put up a physics post this thread alone was filling up several pages when you had Google not omit any search entries on a "CERN data match" search on a library computer. (How I find related events connected to it thanks to how Google's search engine works, one in major event in particular.) When I put it up rather than explain in detail why CERN's neutrinos were NOT actually exceeding the speed of light I took advantage of the event's "faster than light" name fresh in the public's mind and the claim made and went with it for shock value and to go with the momentum of the flow rather than slow it down by explaining it and focused on the data itself being accurate and matching SLAC's E158 data as discussed years before never thinking it would be so easy to prove using basic math thanks to the neutrino and CERN.

I also originally left out Sommerfeld's 1948 "faster than light" discovery using the photon, gravity, and a ton of other related facts with some later mentioned and some still on the way because of how people like to use other people's work and put their name on it to seek credit even going so far as to call Einstein a 19th Century thinker because he refused to accept the uncertainty principle now replaced by {a} the asymmetry of the weak force. Greed is a major force in physics like many other fields where money and prestige is involved. Without a physics degree (which is often to my advantage) I use basic concepts and when needed relatively simple math rather than the complex redundant terminology taught and needed to get a degree. I did a lot of things actually to make sure anyone copying my work without understanding it would expose that fact by showing they had no true comprehension of it. Because of the CERN/SLAC E158 data match two absolutely amazing related events have happened since CERN's announcement and because of what CERN did I waited this time to stop any more "loose cables" from happening and will be posting on it here later. It has also added something very important to the New Circle of Fifths that will probably be the needed key to make many aware of the function of the asymmetry involved with time.

But for now I just want to make it clear without reading pages of posts like the one before this that the neutrino does not exceed the speed of light as this thread's post subject says. The weak force forms the neutrino's space at the speed of light as mentioned within my posts online. But it was and still is important to keep the "neutrinos faster than light" in the discussion as that is what the public and press remember about it.

I thought a lot about the title and there were two other subject titles I considered, one stating the data was correct with no mention of "faster than light", and the other was "neutrino's do not exceed the speed of light" which after CERN's follow up claim would have been a big mistake hiding the fact SLAC's data matched it.
_________________
Think Peace...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2015 11:51 am    Post subject: Summery review of past posts Reply with quote

This is a post I just put up on Yourtube. It has the SLAC E158/ CERN neutrino data match calculations stated better so it's easier to see the E158 ratio reduced down to 453.6 miles and thought I'd post it here as well for anyone interested that has not done the calculations to see the data match for themselves, and give them a glimpse of what was discussed here in great detail many years ago.

I am getting ready to put up another post exposing something quite spectacular that deals with gravity I deliberately left out while waiting for what became an 11 year experiment to fail knowing that would be the best time to post it while the top astronomers and physicists involved are scratching their heads in need of an answer to why an experiment they were certain would work failed where again the claim "Einstein was wrong" is being made due to it failing by some authors of science literature.

However the failure is not Einstein's theory of Special Relativity as some are now again claiming, but rather a failure to understand what was discussed here on Korg Forum supported by the announcement the experiment failed... in need of an explanation. But this time I will wait a while and let the truth set in without debate.

"Relative to the Observer all other observer's are behind it in time."

Relative to an Initial Inertial Frame of Reference there is only one Observer: O=E. Call it what you like... just don't say information is lost to create your own awareness in failing to understand what a wait state is. Mass has always existed and will continue to exist. The speed of light is created by Mass Oscillation and is Life's pendulum and it's rate of Mass oscillation connected to time is fixed and time dilation does not change that fact. The equation for the Unified Field Theory must create the first particle via the 4 forces and keep on going which exposed Life's particle making clock and the realization that the weak force must have asymmetry. Credit goes to SLAC's E158 team for supplying it's ratio value which adds one hour every thousand years.


The weak force is an oscillator. Consciousness has Mass as I believe Rosalind Franklin discovered explaining why she was withholding the DNA's X-Ray. We see the photon move just as we see the Sun rotate around the Earth... and the observation is reference frame dependent. History repeats itself unless something very unusual stops it which would require an asymmetry added and the next step in physics is made by accepting what the photon's non-moving clock tells us. Both views of the Sun and the photon are real, but one is an illusion we rely on in our daily affairs and the other is a technical fact.


The neutrino has a function in Nature and provides the photon's needed force carrier space separating the weak force from the strong force and this is easy to prove if you can do (very) simple math thanks to CERN and SLAC that created the needed measurement data. The neutrino is not a true antiparticle as once thought but it certainly can appear like that because it is an empty shell of transfer space left over stuck in time where it separates the weak force from the strong force. And because E=T where time like energy must be conserved it has an asymmetric partner not yet observed outside of the theory that supports it connected to the other elements of the theory that have been verified... explaining the well known mysteries that verify it. The asymmetry of the weak force is exposing the cause of gravity despite in all likelihood it is also confusing those holding a loose cable seeing that it's asymmetrical subtrahend of 0.20e-5 sec. in 453.6 light speed miles does not match the value of G. Nor does it's raio of force relative to the electric force. But there a simple reason of leverage that explains the unexpected size when using time to measure it. The gravity created is just as real as Universal gravity outside the area of separation and as stated many years ago the two frames of reference cannot mix their phase timing of force but that is a post for a later date.


Related to the discussion of Time... in Sept 2011 CERN shocked the world when CERN's scientists announced that if their measurement following Fermilab's less accurate observations of muon neutrinos moving @ (v-c)/c=2.48e-5 sec. in 453.6 miles was correct then Einstein was wrong. The same guy who was "wrong" when he refused to accept the uncertainty principle and use dice to make measurements. And if you are paying attention to what's going on in astronomy then you know it is being said he was "wrong" again. Truth is he just wasn't finished with the equation E=mc2 and the E158 data he needed providing the ratio of weak force asymmetry to add was not available until 2003.

Here's a copy of some simple calculations handed to the director of LIGO regarding CERN's “Superluminal” Neutrino Abnormality announced September 2011 @ (v-c)/c=2.48e-5 sec in 453.6 miles.

They show using basic math that CERN's Muon phase neutrinos @ (v-c/c)=2.48e-5 sec in 453.6 miles match SLAC's E158 asymmetry of the weak force ratio @ 2.48e-5 sec in 453.6 miles creating an asymmetry in time of 20e-5 sec. A year after this was shown on Nature's Forum next to CERN's scientists trying to figure out why their data was showing Einstein was wrong if it were correct SLAC went back over their BaBar experiment's data and confirmed "looking at it differently" time has asymmetry. Of course... gravity is real.

Open up a calculator and it's easy to follow along. "{a}" is the algebraic symbol of the value in effect of WF Asy:

Weak Force Asymmetry {a} adds 1hour/3600 seconds every 1000 years: Re: SLAC E158 "using clocks". Muon Neutrino's do not exceed the speed of light because they were created at the SOL. Einstein was right, not wrong:

3600sec / 1000 years = 3.6 seconds WF Asy {a} added in one year. So we put that into the speed of light distance because space is relative to time. They are one and the same outside the atom.

3.6 sec x 186282 (speed of light) = 670615.2 which is the {a} WF asy in distance added to the speed of light in one year so....

670615.2 / 365.2425 days in a year = 1836.082055072999 is the {a} WF asy SOL distance added to speed of light in one day

1836.082055072999 / 24 hours = 76.50341896137498 is the {a} WF asy time/distance added to speed of light in one hour

76.50341896137498 / 60 minutes = 1.275056982689583 is the {a} WF asy added to speed of light in one minute

1.275056982689583 / 60 seconds = 0.021250949711493 is the {a} WF asy added to speed of light in one second

Now if the Earth were bigger and CERN's neutrinos had traveled a little over 186282 miles (one second + WF Asy gained @ SOL) we would be done, but since they only traveled 453.6 miles we need to keep going till we get to the amount of {a} added in 453.6 miles. So we divide the miles light travels in one second by the miles CERN's neutrinos traveled.

86282 miles or one second/453.6 miles, the percentage of a one second gain which is = 410.6746031746032

Now we divide it into the WF Asy one second gain from above (.021250949711493 )

0.021250949711493 / 410.6746031746032= 5.174644243208279e-5

That just gave us the total forward and back total neutrino oscillation WF Asy {a} time gained in 453.6 miles. Now notice it is almost exactly double CERN's 2.48e-5 sec SOL gain announced Worldwide before the politics SLAC ignored stepped in.

So pay attention because the next two simple calculations dividing it in half and using CERN's 2.48e-5 as a forward arrow "stopping point" to add the .10e-5 sec remaining difference to the other half to make it fit is a game changer from the "dice" (uncertainty principle) to two sided cards (two oscillation arrows connected to time) because CERN's data matching SLAC's E158 ratio shows time has a reverse Mass oscillation phase arrow direction, and that means the neutrino has an asymmetric reverse direction partner that measures a little bigger than the neutrino giving time an asymmetry. And note the specific and exceptionally long SOL distances that create the asymmetry of the weak force ratio SLAC's E158 team measured. Add to that I had been quoting the E158 data for years after finding it and expected it to match like this to add the asymmetry to space calling it a lesser diesis harmonic comma and you can see this was no coincidence. (This was written before SLAC went back over their BaBar data and confirmed the asymmetry in time giving the discovery a sigma 14 level of certainty in Nov 2012.)

5.174644243208279e-5 /2 = 2.58732212160414e-5 sec

That gave us the forward arrow of time WF Asy gain in 453.6 miles that is .10e-5 sec over CERN's 2.48e-5 sec in CERN's equation @ (v-c)/c=2.48e-5. So we subtract the difference:

2.58e-5 - 2.48e-5 = .10e-5 sec

And add it to the other half: 10e-5 + 2.58e-5 = 2.68e-5 giving the second reverse arrow an asymmetry in time of .20e-5 sec, the difference in size of the forward arrow @ 2.48e-5

2.68e-5 - 2.48e-5 = .20e-5 sec

So using basic math we see that CERN's muon neutrinos @ (v-c)/c =2.48e-5 sec in 453.6 miles creates an asymmetry in time (Einstein's Comma) of .20e-5 sec just as I predicted it would simply by using CERN's forward arrow gain of 2.48e-5 sec to show where we "fold" space and add SLAC's E158 remaining ratio that fits filling in the second reverse Mass oscillation arrow with 2.68e-5 sec. If you add an asymmetry to time you must end up with one and to create gravity it must occur in the second half so the reverse arrow is a little longer. This shows Gravity is caused by the subtrahend of the electromagnetic wave where one side points up relative to the observer and the other side points down every other Mass oscillation because it takes the time of two Mass oscillations to create one instance of an observed center of gravity. Gravity is created by the remaining weak force asymmetry gained in the second reverse arrow of time with the forward arrow measuring 2.48e-5 sec in 453.6 miles.

If it were wrong the numbers wouldn't say it was correct and someone would have corrected it in the last 4 years.

I left something quite startling and important out related to the effect of weak force asymmetry in both physics and astronomy for a very good reason. I should have waited a few months after CERN's Sept 2011 announcement to show what caused it so the politics would not have tried to hide the solution not that it stopped SLAC from confirming the asymmetry in time exposed by the E158/CERN data match. But then again anyone following my work over the years would know what caused it so I had no choice if I wanted credit for the discovery in a world too often controlled by greed and a desire for power. Lucky for all of us that requires knowledge and only a fool acts in bad faith. Adding the asymmetry of the weak force to measurements on the atomic scale is like adding the drive shaft to a car allowing it to move forward without getting out and pushing it.

And this post summery is highly related to music theory I should add for it is showing space is forming in an harmonic octave level structure and the further back in time we look the lower the octave level of frequency. The more roommates E and therefore G has... the weaker it's vote is.

JFH^^

Edit 8-26-2019 Links in my posts have been being redirected... credit to Omari for bringing this to my attention to correct links. Good luck with your studies;-) UFT support post following in timeline of Korg DNA posts from over a decade ago to follow coming soon.
_________________
Think Peace...


Last edited by John Hendry on Tue Aug 27, 2019 4:35 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:08 pm    Post subject: Time never lies when it tells all.... Reply with quote

xmlguy wrote:

Feel free to post links to any credible scientists who directly agree with you and specifically refer to your posts as news.


Well being as it was a week old discovery I'd say let's give it a chance and see what time does with the discovery... as for reality in the real world your statements and what time has done to them speaks for itself without my adding to it.

Here you go... Professor Rao is one of the top radiation experts in the world that deserves a Nobel Prize for his chain of discoveries.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273124050_43_SUPPORT_TO_THE_PAPER_on_Discovery_of_superluminal_velocities_of_X-rays_and_Bharat_Radiation_challenging_the_validity_of_Einstein's_formula_E_mc2

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013IJAP....4d...8R

Discovery of superluminal velocities of X-rays and Bharat Radiation challenging the validity of Einstein's formula E=mc2

Rao, M. A. Padmanabha

Professor of Medical Physics, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, Jolly Grant, Uttaranchal, India (2001)
Head, Radiation Safety Group & Deputy Director (Sc.E), Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India (1983-‘97)
Lecturer in Medical Physics, Department of Nuclear Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences , New Delhi (1964-1983).

IOSR Journal of Applied Physics (IOSR-JAP), Volume 4, Issue 4, p. 8-14
The current paper reports discovery of superluminal velocities of X-rays, and Bharat Radiation in 12.87 to 31 nm range from solar spectra. The discovery challenges the 100 year old Albert Einstein's assertion that nothing can go faster than velocity of light c in vacuum while formulating E = mc2 in his special theory of relativity reported in 1905 [1]. Several solar spectra recorded at various wavelengths by Woods et al in 2011 demonstrated GOES X-rays arriving earlier than 13.5 nm emission, which in turn arriving earlier than 33.5 nm emission [2]. Finally, the investigators faced difficulty in concluding that short wavelengths traveled fast because of lack of information whether all the three emissions originated from the same source and at the same time. Very recently the author has reported GOES X-rays (7.0 nm) cause 13.5 nm (Bharat Radiation), which in turn causes 33.5 nm Extreme ultraviolet (EUV) emission from same excited atoms present in solar flare by Padmanabha Rao Effect [3, 4]. Based on these findings, the author succeeded in explaining how the solar spectral findings provide direct evidences on superluminal velocities of GOES X-ray and 13.5 nm Bharat Radiation emissions, when 33.5 nm EUV emission is considered travelling at velocity of light c. Among X-ray wavelengths, the short wavelength 7.0 nm X-rays traveled faster than 9.4 nm X-rays, while X-rays go at superluminal velocities. Among Bharat radiation wavelengths, short wavelengths showed fast travel, while Bharat Radiation goes at superluminal velocities as compared to 33.5 EUV emission.

DOI: 10.9790/4861-0440814

More: http://www.forbesindia.com/blog/technology/what-this-75-yr-olds-story-tells-us-about-discovery-in-india/

I put up a quick post on Scientific America congratulating Professor Reo for his chain of discoveries & Nobel Prize votes but stated although E=mc2 needed adjustment I felt he was proving Einstein correct and stated why using the fine structure constant to show the correction eliminating the uncertainty principle. He then filed my post on ResearchGate in support of his work. History shows if everyone had agreed with me... I would have been wrong and Einstein would a "19th Century thinker" as he is sometimes referred to now because he would not give up on logic and except using dice. The E158 ratio needed to finish the Unified Field Theory and correct E=mc2 was not known until 2003 and required Einstein's work to discover it.

ResearchGate #43. SUPPORT TO THE PAPER on Discovery of superluminal velocities of X-rays and Bharat Radiation

SUPPORT to the research paper on superluminal X-rays and Bharat Radiation challenging the validity of Einstein’s formula E= mc2.
Refer comment by JohnFHendry in the following article:

Particles Found to Travel Faster Than Speed of Light
Neutrino results challenge a cornerstone of Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity, which itself forms the foundation of modern physics. http://www.scientificamerican.com/…/particles-found-to-tra…/

September 22, 2011 |By Geoff Brumfiel and Nature magazine
_________________
Think Peace...


Last edited by John Hendry on Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:30 am; edited 8 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:29 am    Post subject: What's up Doc... Reply with quote

It has been brought to my attention that a PDF copy of Nature's Sept 22, 2011 article "Particles break light-speed limit" similar to Scientific America's article "Particles Found to Travel Faster Than Speed of Light" referenced above by Professor Rao was created on October 23, 2014 with an incomplete forum discussion thread leaving out my posts and resulting discussions of SLAC's E158 ratio matching CERN's neutrino data and has been circulated with only the first thirteen pages of the posts up until September 24, 2011 10:23:06 PM which despite the large number of pages was just 2 days after the article was posted. Therefore a simple question has been raised as to why this PDF file was created so long after the fact on October 23, 2014 three years later and filed incomplete, and how was it generated after Nature deleted the entire historic thread? My first post #27342 next to CERN scientist Dario Crosett was not posted until October 3, 2011 04:18 AM on October 3, 2011. My last post #43178 with the calculations simplified was posted on April 25, 2012 before the entire historic debate was deleted. As some of you may recall despite deleting all the posts Nature left the commenting period open which created a second thread completely different than the original thread I pointed out exposing support for the "loose cable" claim in my opinion. I hope I'm wrong but after June 9, 2009 I don't trust anyone where there's money to be made.

The document is found @ http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/energy/1112/articles/nature/SuperlumNeutrinosBrumfiel.pdf and is associated with 2 other CERN documents created on the same date and time that have not been examined yet @ http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/energy/1112/articles/nature/

The first post matches the records and was Sander Heinsalu's Sept 22, 2011 post stating:

"Both measurement error and faster than light speed seem unlikely in this case, but I consider faster than light travel the more unlikely of the two."

And the last post shown was Shrimpton McClams's Sept 24, 2011 post stating:

"While the prudence is obviously incredibly important here, I have to say that the people dismissing the study without a specific critique of the experiment grow a little tiresome. The experimenters were exceedingly diligent. If errors occurred it's going to require more than an off-hand dismissal or a casual critique that the experimenters already addressed in the study."

Going back over this brings back a lot of excitement as I forgot they ran the experiment 16,000 times over a 3 year period before going public with it... that explains the accuracy... and the cost. It's sad so many great scientists that made it possible are getting shafted by the politics of a loose cable that goes back to Sommerfeld's observations of the photon back in the late 40's.
_________________
Think Peace...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John Hendry
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 423
Location: America

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2019 7:27 am    Post subject: 43.SUPPORT TO THE PAPER on Discovery of superluminal X-rays Reply with quote

There have been links being lost or changed so I'm posting Professor Rao's Support paper #43 on ResearchGate as found via the link in above post.

ResearchGate

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/273124050

43. SUPPORT TO THE PAPER on Discovery of
superluminal velocities of X-rays and Bharat
Radiation challenging the validity of Einstein’s
formula E= mc2

DATASET · MARCH 2015 1 AUTHOR: M.A. Padmanabha Rao
Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India

90 PUBLICATIONS 29 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE


Available from: M.A. Padmanabha Rao
Retrieved on: 23 June 2015
Discovery of Superluminal Velocities of Xrays and Bharat Radiation

SUPPORT to the research paper on superluminal Xrays and Bharat Radiation.

Refer comment by JohnFHendry in the following article: Particles Found to Travel Faster Than Speed of Light

Neutrino results challenge a cornerstone of Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity, which itself forms the
foundation of modern physics.http://www.scientificamerican.com/…/particlesfoundtotra…/
September 22, 2011 |By Geoff Brumfiel and Nature magazine

JohnFHendry M.A.PadmanabhaRao February 17, 2014, 9:42 AM

To M.A. Padmanabha Rao:

First let me congratulate on your observations as they are quite valuable in proving the cause of gravity which obviously few "talking" scientists are aware of yet, as well as resolving an old augment that goes back to Sommerfeld's "superluminal" observation of the photon in 1948 caused by the asymmetry of the weak force the SLAC's E158 team detected and announced in 2003.

In support of your statements after the solution to CERN's neutrino data was published in Oct 2011 that showed SLAC's E158 WF Asy data matched CERN's observation of neutrinos @ (v-c)/c=2.48e5 sec in 453.6 miles creating the lesser diesis comma of .20e5 sec in time asymmetry, despite CERN's "loose cable" SLAC went back over their Babar experiment's data and indeed detected time has asymmetry and announced it as a new discovery giving it a sigma 14 level of certainty. That robust data added to the CERN neutrino/SLAC E158 2.48e5 data match creating 20e5 sec in time asymmetry is revealing the cause of gravity is the gratrino subtrahend of the neutrino (acting as two harmonic commas) as predicted almost a decade before CERN's worldwide announcement. CERN's announcement was the result of detecting their force carrier space and now there can be no reasonable argument against time having asymmetry not to mention what causes the force of gravity showing space is forming in a harmonic octave
structure.

The asymmetry of the weak force is what I believe you too have detected in making the same claim of superluminal Xray and Bharat Radiation. Please note your observations are in support of what I hesitate to call a new theory of gravity supporting the observation that time has two arrows that must be in existence to support an asymmetry in time showing E=T because time is the product of energy, and time like energy must be conserved and is using space as the force carrier of gravity to do so.

Rather than challenge Einstein as others making similar observations of EM waves, I think you will find an in depth study of the weak force acting as an oscillator creating a speed of light clock we are observing resulting constant time dilation in effect to be of far greater benefit. The claim you are making is not challenging Einstein, but rather supporting him by eliminating uncertainty and the dice he refused to accept through exposing the cause of his "biggest blunder": the Cosmological Constant created by the asymmetry of the weak force that's value I express a {a}. E=mc2 is correct, but only relative to the weak force. It takes space (neutrino) relative to time to move the photon's E from the weak force into the strong force's opposite phase timing and the neutrino is acting as the photon's (quasi) antiparticle created at the speed of light. Relative to the strong force E=m+{a} c2.

I believe you will find a research paper in support of Sommerfeld's 1948 observations of the photon by G. Nimtz and A. A. Stahlhofen [arXiv:0708.0681v1] of value because it also states using photons they have observed a violation of the speed of light through demonstrating the quantum mechanical behavior of evanescent modes on a meterlength scale, and their belief that the barriers are crossed in zero time to imply not only superluminal, but infinite tunneling velocity. That is obviously illogical as is seeing Nature's electron phase timed neutrino's with Mass in oscillation reaching Earth at the speed of light from a Super Nova ten's of thousands of light years away showing something physics says is impossible, and then using it to dismiss CERN's manmade muon phase timed neutrinos @ (v-c)/c=2.48e5 in 453.6 miles. When science see's the "impossible" happening in a pattern there is always a logical reason and it usually turns out to have a very simple and obvious solution.

And when you take the missing "Dark matter" and energy into account exposing a ratio that shows the further back in time we look the more matter is missing the more obvious the solution is provided by the asymmetry of the weak force caused by two harmonic commas showing space is forming in a harmonic octave structure controlled by gravity.

"The more roommates E has the less power it's vote has".

The fine structure constant equation must be connected to a true or initial inertial frame of reference to hold the value of weak force asymmetry: (e{a})/t=hv

It was wise for Scientific America to leave the comment section of this September 22, 2011 article open and not hide the post's on it as Nature's Forum did. But you can still find the comments on it thanks' to Google.

JFH^^
_________________
Think Peace...


Last edited by John Hendry on Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:17 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deniće033



Joined: 19 May 2023
Posts: 31
Location: Tennessee

PostPosted: Tue May 30, 2023 2:38 am    Post subject: @JohnHendry Reply with quote

This post has been interesting to read.
Sound, vibration and frequency.
Health and prosperity to you and your family.
_________________
Korg Kross 2
Korg EK-50 CSA
KO4ESA/WRJR757
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korg Forums Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group